Bush White House politics linked to terror alerts
Photo 
In this Sept. 4, 2008 file photo, Tom Ridge, former secretary of Homeland Security and former Pennsylvania governor speaks to the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn.
WASHINGTON Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge says pressure from fellow Cabinet members to raise the nation's terror alert level just before the 2004 presidential election helped convince him it was time to quit working for President George W. Bush.
In a new book, Ridge says that despite the urgings of former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft he objected to raising the security level, according to a publicity release from the book's publisher.
In the end the alert level was not changed.
Bush's former homeland security adviser, Frances Townsend, said Thursday that politics never played a role in determining alert levels.
Two tapes were released by al-Qaida in the weeks leading up to the election — one by terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and the other by a man calling himself "Azzam the American." Terrorism experts suspected that "Azzam the American" was Adam Gadahn, a 26-year-old Californian whom the FBI had been urgently seeking.
Townsend said the videotapes contained "very graphic" and "threatening" messages.
Townsend said that anytime there was a discussion of changing the alert level, she first spoke with Ridge and then, if necessary, called a meeting of the homeland security council comprising the secretaries of defense and homeland security, the attorney general and CIA and FBI directors. The group then made a recommendation to the president about whether the color-coded threat level should be raised.
"Never were politics ever discussed in this context in my presence," she said.
Asked if there was any reason for Ridge to have felt pressured, Townsend said: "He was certainly not pressured. And, by the way, he didn't object when it was raised and he certainly didn't object when it wasn't raised."
Ridge's publicist, Joe Rinaldi, said Ridge was out of town and was not doing interviews until his book, "The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege ... and How We Can Be Safe Again," is released on Sept. 1.
In 2004, Ridge explained why he didn't feel the alert should be raised. "We don't have to go to (code level) orange to take action in response either to these tapes or just general action to improve security around the country," he said then.
In 2005, months after he resigned, Ridge said his agency has been the most reluctant to raise the alert level. "There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?'" he said during a panel discussion in May 2005. But his book appears to be the first time he publicly attributes some of the pressure to politics.
The Homeland Security Department, which Ridge was the first person to lead, faced criticism in 2004 from Democrats who alleged that raising the alert level was designed to boost support for the Bush administration during an election year.
Ridge, who resigned on Nov. 30, 2004, said the episode convinced him to follow through with his plans to leave the Bush administration.
A former Republican congressman and governor of Pennsylvania, Ridge was widely named as a potential running mate to John McCain in 2008 before the GOP candidate chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Aug 22, 2009 at 11:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Andre, the funny part he disclosed by himself, using the wrong account, that he is the sock puppet. What a clown.
Aug 22, 2009 at 7:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
aruba...lol, did you think you were logged in the other account? If so I am sorry for assigning Chad to the deception.
Aug 22, 2009 at 5:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
There goes Puppet Master again thinking he knows more than anyone else. And as usual you're wrong again. If you think I'm chad then explain how the we can both post comments at the same time under different names? You lie just like your hero Bush to try an make points. Typical right wing nut job.
Aug 22, 2009 at 2:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
You picked the name because you got tired of not making your point(s)/argument(s) work with your other account. So the adult reaction you made, after your first lame attempt of the sock puppet “retire”, was this sock puppet step selecting a handicap name in the hopes of what?
Real adults can handle banter and ridicule without curling in the corner and pouting. This just begs the question; Chad does your Mom know you are using her computer?
Aug 22, 2009 at 12:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
All politics aside, justaguy hit it right on the head. If you read the article it's a "he said, she said" with Ridge trying to drum up interest in his book by creating controversy. Otherwise, why wouldn't he have brought this to light 4 years ago.
Aug 21, 2009 at 11:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
And leave it to a right winger not to even know what type of Government his own country has.
Aug 21, 2009 at 11:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
http://people-press.org/report/478/bush-...
Aug 21, 2009 at 11:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
RAF(aka PuppetMaster)...I picked that name because it's representative of the right wing babble you produce just like toasty and the BS that comes out of the Bush family and their "New World Order" and "Mission Accomplished" and "We don't torture" mantras.
Aug 21, 2009 at 10:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
"The dems need to make themself look better over the heath care bill so lets bring Bill back into the story to make obama look good". "My bad ... I meant bring bush back into the story"
Aug 21, 2009 at 9:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
This ridge guy is trying to sell books, ever hear of "making things up" to make a book sell better? He's hoping some suckers will buy it to help make his life a bit better,it's kinda funny he's bringing his book out on the eve of 9/11. I wouldn't trust this guy anymore than I would someone in the white house or that works for the government. I see we still have all these "obama isn't doing his job so lets bring in bush and blame him" people here, I'm not a dem or rep but I can see when the dems are digging when I see it. The dems need to make themself look better over the heath care bill so lets bring Bill back into the story to make obama look good.This ridge guy is a joke.
Aug 21, 2009 at 9:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
"They instituted the electoral college which is a corruption of democracy"
One reason the electoral college was instituted was to avoid from electing any joe blow who could win the popular vote. How is that corruption of democracy?
Aug 21, 2009 at 8:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hey sock puppet #2. Do you see the irony in your name? The only ones that agree and speak the same as "Retarded" (as in your name RetardedAirForce) are the left wing...pretty funny if you think about it.
Aug 21, 2009 at 8:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
I still don't trust any of them........
Aug 21, 2009 at 8:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Anybody find this a revelation? GWB is the worst self serving, most underserving, overrated President ever.
Aug 21, 2009 at 6:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
C'mon folks. Were any of you really shocked to hear any of this? What a black mark on American history the W. administration was.
Aug 21, 2009 at 5:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
toasty...better go back to school and learn something. I hate to inform you, but this country has been a Republic since it's inception. And wasn't it all during 2007 that Dumbya kept saying "our economy is fundamentally sound" Just another lie he perpetrated on the American public. The American people have already judged him as a failure, along with the rest of the world. I can't wait to see what else we find out what the puppet and Torture King did while in office.
Aug 21, 2009 at 4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ezoner your lack of knowledge about the founding fathers is staggering. They instituted the electoral college which is a corruption of democracy. They had slaves, provided no rights for women and past the Sedition act. What have you read about the founding fathers? Name a book, magazine article, anything?
Aug 21, 2009 at 3:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Unfortunately, Bush was the first president to push for and sign legislation to cut taxes while the United States was at war. That is a big part of the problem.
Aug 21, 2009 at 3:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Proartist, my definition of lemming is a non-thinking, blind follower; one who supports those merely claiming to represent his or her interests; especially blind loyalty to a particular political party, when the evidence says to believe otherwise. Always trust your own judgment over the claims of anyone in power. Question everything. Facts should be consistent with what is being claimed. (Informed participation is a good thing but I don't see its relevance to what I wrote.)
Aug 21, 2009 at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
RetardedAirForce- Why don't you take a look at your own party. You know the one that controlled congress the last couple of years, passed legislation and threw our country into economic hell? Or how about the same party that is turning this country in the People's Republic of the United States?
Aug 21, 2009 at 1:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
I don't take your comment as harsh, fool_on_the_hill. But, I do think you reflect the essence of my previous comment. There is a huge difference between "blind obedience" and informed participation. If you consider all your fellow citizens who participate in the democratic process (which is also open to you) "lemmings", then you aptly demonstrate my point and exactly why our national will and any real sense of community is in peril. "That government is the strongest of which every man feels himself a part." – Thomas Jefferson
Aug 21, 2009 at 1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
OMG is this saying that Bush might have raised terror levels before the elections to scare people into voting for him?
O wait...that was what the iraq war was
Aug 21, 2009 at 1:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Pro art -- I honestly believe that when the constitution was drafted, that for te most part you could trust most. They had very common goals, enemies and objectives, -- there were some dissenting opinions. Todays politicians are not about noble service -- they are about money and power, which is why I am thankful that the founding fathers had the insight to have protections and cross dependencies between all branches of the government. To attempt to keep the temptation for corruption of the process under control.
In the end -- I trust no-one except myself. I hold my own destiny in my hands. I do not enter into contracts that exceed my ability and resources to pay and do not plan on others to prop me up.
Aug 21, 2009 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
But...ProArtist has a point in his last sentence:
.
"If politicians cannot be trusted and all lie, looking in the mirror and honestly assessing YOUR role might be the best first step toward better government."
Aug 21, 2009 at 12:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
With all due respect, proartist, that has to be the worst political advice I have ever read in these comments. I sure hope you don't teach that stuff to your children. Sorry to sound harsh but this isn't merely a difference of opinion.
I'm sure we'll all never agree on any one political philosophy, but we should all agree that NO government should EVER be trusted! Our founding fathers repeatedly warned us, then put those words into action in the form of a written Constitution and three branches of government, including a bicameral legislature. What our founding fathers were saying, unequivocally, is: no governing body should ever be trusted, including THIS one! I consider that CYA on steroids.
There is a name for the type of government that results whenever the masses express blind faith in their leader(s): "totalitarian dictatorship". The major difference between guys like Stalin, Hitler, Castro, Hussein, etc and that loud-mouth bigot sitting at the end of the bar in every tavern is that the latter hasn't convinced a hoard of blind lemmings to give him unlimited power to wield over others. Otherwise than that, they're all pretty much the same. (Wasn't that the implicit point of this article?) Again, sorry to be so harsh but, in this case, you are simply wrong.
Aug 21, 2009 at 10:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Well said proartist!
Aug 21, 2009 at 10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
If don't you trust any politician and believe they all lie, regardless of party, you clearly have no faith in your fellow citizens and no faith in the ballot. You have probably never gotten to know your elected representatives face-to-face and clearly don't have the courage to become a candidate yourself in spite of self-proclaimed wisdom and infinite self-importance. If that is the case, then it follows you have no respect nor trust in a functional and adaptable Constitution. No democratic society has long survived when its citizenry failed to believe everyone in the community works together for the common good rather than singular self-interests. Keep in mind that WE, the people, are the government. Good or bad, it directly reflects us. If politicians cannot be trusted and all lie, looking in the mirror and honestly assessing YOUR role might be the best first step toward better government.
Aug 21, 2009 at 10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
This is the what the Republican party is all about "FEAR" That's how they control you. They did it during the Bush years and they are doing it now to stop health care reform. They are spreading lies and misinformation through the Internet and their beloved Fox News. For some reason too many people pick up on this fear mongering and believe its the truth.
Aug 21, 2009 at 9:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
If you trust any politician, regardless of party, you are uneducated.
Aug 21, 2009 at 9:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
You can tell a politician is lying....their lips move.
Aug 21, 2009 at 7:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
I don't trust any of them, Democrat or Republican.
Aug 21, 2009 at 7:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
It's time for America to realize the GOP are a bunch of scumbags that care more about politics than the country.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.